Current Perspectives in Intra Operative Airway Management in Maxillofacial Trauma

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: Maxillofacial trauma presents a complex problem due to the disruption of normal anatomy. In such cases, we anticipate a difficult oral intubation that may hinder intraoperative IMF. Nasal and skull base fractures do not advocate use of nasotracheal intubation. Hence, other anesthetic techniques should be considered in management of maxillofacial trauma patients with occlusal derangement and nasal deformity. This study evaluates the indications and outcomes of anesthetic management by retromolar, nasal, submental intubation and tracheostomy. Methodology: Of the 49 maxillofacial trauma cases reviewed, that required intraoperative IMF, 32 underwent nasal intubation, 9 patients had tracheostomy, 5 patients utilized submental approach and 3 underwent retromolar intubation. Results: Among patients who underwent nasal intubation, eight cases needed fiberoptic assistance. In retromolar approach, though no complication was encountered, constant monitoring was mandatory to avoid risk of tube displacement. Consequently, submental intubation required a surgical procedure which could result in a cosmetically acceptable scar. Though invasive, tracheostomy has its benefits for long term ventilation. Conclusion: Intubation of any form performed in a maxillofacial trauma patient is complex and requires both sound judgement and considerable experience.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)138-143
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery
Volume11
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-06-2012

Fingerprint

Airway Management
Intubation
Nose
Wounds and Injuries
Tracheostomy
Anesthetics
Skull Fractures
Skull Base
Cicatrix
Ventilation
Anatomy

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Oral Surgery
  • Surgery
  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

@article{039273ff683b4a4f80f882559f5d0cef,
title = "Current Perspectives in Intra Operative Airway Management in Maxillofacial Trauma",
abstract = "Objective: Maxillofacial trauma presents a complex problem due to the disruption of normal anatomy. In such cases, we anticipate a difficult oral intubation that may hinder intraoperative IMF. Nasal and skull base fractures do not advocate use of nasotracheal intubation. Hence, other anesthetic techniques should be considered in management of maxillofacial trauma patients with occlusal derangement and nasal deformity. This study evaluates the indications and outcomes of anesthetic management by retromolar, nasal, submental intubation and tracheostomy. Methodology: Of the 49 maxillofacial trauma cases reviewed, that required intraoperative IMF, 32 underwent nasal intubation, 9 patients had tracheostomy, 5 patients utilized submental approach and 3 underwent retromolar intubation. Results: Among patients who underwent nasal intubation, eight cases needed fiberoptic assistance. In retromolar approach, though no complication was encountered, constant monitoring was mandatory to avoid risk of tube displacement. Consequently, submental intubation required a surgical procedure which could result in a cosmetically acceptable scar. Though invasive, tracheostomy has its benefits for long term ventilation. Conclusion: Intubation of any form performed in a maxillofacial trauma patient is complex and requires both sound judgement and considerable experience.",
author = "B. Vidya and Cariappa, {K. M.} and Kamath, {Abhay T.}",
year = "2012",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s12663-011-0316-8",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
pages = "138--143",
journal = "Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery",
issn = "0972-8279",
number = "2",

}

Current Perspectives in Intra Operative Airway Management in Maxillofacial Trauma. / Vidya, B.; Cariappa, K. M.; Kamath, Abhay T.

In: Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery, Vol. 11, No. 2, 01.06.2012, p. 138-143.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Current Perspectives in Intra Operative Airway Management in Maxillofacial Trauma

AU - Vidya, B.

AU - Cariappa, K. M.

AU - Kamath, Abhay T.

PY - 2012/6/1

Y1 - 2012/6/1

N2 - Objective: Maxillofacial trauma presents a complex problem due to the disruption of normal anatomy. In such cases, we anticipate a difficult oral intubation that may hinder intraoperative IMF. Nasal and skull base fractures do not advocate use of nasotracheal intubation. Hence, other anesthetic techniques should be considered in management of maxillofacial trauma patients with occlusal derangement and nasal deformity. This study evaluates the indications and outcomes of anesthetic management by retromolar, nasal, submental intubation and tracheostomy. Methodology: Of the 49 maxillofacial trauma cases reviewed, that required intraoperative IMF, 32 underwent nasal intubation, 9 patients had tracheostomy, 5 patients utilized submental approach and 3 underwent retromolar intubation. Results: Among patients who underwent nasal intubation, eight cases needed fiberoptic assistance. In retromolar approach, though no complication was encountered, constant monitoring was mandatory to avoid risk of tube displacement. Consequently, submental intubation required a surgical procedure which could result in a cosmetically acceptable scar. Though invasive, tracheostomy has its benefits for long term ventilation. Conclusion: Intubation of any form performed in a maxillofacial trauma patient is complex and requires both sound judgement and considerable experience.

AB - Objective: Maxillofacial trauma presents a complex problem due to the disruption of normal anatomy. In such cases, we anticipate a difficult oral intubation that may hinder intraoperative IMF. Nasal and skull base fractures do not advocate use of nasotracheal intubation. Hence, other anesthetic techniques should be considered in management of maxillofacial trauma patients with occlusal derangement and nasal deformity. This study evaluates the indications and outcomes of anesthetic management by retromolar, nasal, submental intubation and tracheostomy. Methodology: Of the 49 maxillofacial trauma cases reviewed, that required intraoperative IMF, 32 underwent nasal intubation, 9 patients had tracheostomy, 5 patients utilized submental approach and 3 underwent retromolar intubation. Results: Among patients who underwent nasal intubation, eight cases needed fiberoptic assistance. In retromolar approach, though no complication was encountered, constant monitoring was mandatory to avoid risk of tube displacement. Consequently, submental intubation required a surgical procedure which could result in a cosmetically acceptable scar. Though invasive, tracheostomy has its benefits for long term ventilation. Conclusion: Intubation of any form performed in a maxillofacial trauma patient is complex and requires both sound judgement and considerable experience.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84929663243&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84929663243&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s12663-011-0316-8

DO - 10.1007/s12663-011-0316-8

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84929663243

VL - 11

SP - 138

EP - 143

JO - Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery

JF - Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery

SN - 0972-8279

IS - 2

ER -